Wednesday, February 1, 2006

Winter’s assault of rock salt

By Bruce Wenning/ Special To The Tab

 

During the winter our environment is inundated with road salt. Millions of tons of de-icing salt, commonly called rock salt (sodium chloride) is applied to roads, parking lots, sidewalks, driveways, and stairs to melt ice or prevent ice formation. This is done to reduce the hazard of pedestrian slips and falls and vehicle accidents. However, it is not effective below 20 °F.

However, rock salt applied for our safety has several non-target pathways in the environment: (1) it seeps into pavement surfaces and creates a reservoir of salt for later transport for contamination, (2) it is splashed to roadside soil and vegetation by vehicles where it is concentrated in plowed and shoveled snow piles (3) it is washed away by surface runoff into soil, ground water, rivers, lakes, ponds, and streams (4) it leaches through soil into the plant root zone (5) it becomes air-borne into our atmosphere and settles on vegetation (6) it gets onto vehicles and roadway structures contributing to corrosion.

Rock salt is toxic to many perennial plant species of trees, shrubs, grasses and herbs. Salt-contaminated snow and ice eventually melt and leach into soil, killing soil microbes, which contributes to soil compaction.

Rock salt in soil breaks down into ions of sodium and chloride. The chloride ions are the more damaging; when taken up by plant roots in spring and summer they are transported to growing points such as buds and branch tips, killing them. Leaves show symptoms of salt damage by exhibiting brown colored leaf margins. This is where chloride ions were deposited and concentrated in the leaf tissue, creating localized cell death that resembles drought stress. Eventually entire leaves can “brown out” and die. Twigs and small branches can soon follow suit.

Vehicular traffic on salted roads releases pavement salt, making it airborne. Rock salt molecules travel in wind currents created by traffic flow and settle on roadside vegetation. This action, called salt spray, can cover trees as high as forty feet and an area as deep as 150 feet from the road, although the most noticeable plant damage is within thirty feet of the road. Contaminated soil and salt spray are the two most common ways plants get injured from road salt.

Repeated exposure to rock salt by salt sensitive deciduous trees will cause bud death and branch dieback, forcing dormant buds below the affected area to grow out in response. This recovery growth response of multiple stems with leaves is called “witches brooms” and it is diagnostic of salt exposure. It is easily observed on cherry and maple trees along heavily salted roadsides. Another sign of rock salt toxicity is summer and early fall defoliation.

Evergreen trees such as hemlocks and pines show brown-tipped needles well into summer. With annual exposure to salt spray from traffic or soil contamination, the needles turn completely brown, die and fall off. Evergreens and salt-sensitive deciduous plants are weakened by repeated exposure to rock salt, increasing their susceptibility to insects, diseases and fertility problems; this can lead to their premature death.

There are protective measures you can take to lessen the effects of rock salt damage to plants. First, switch to sand or use ice melting products that are safer for plants, pets, and the environment, such as potassium chloride or “pet safe” calcium chloride products, which are effective de-icing compounds to -15 °F and below. Although these products are a little more expensive than rock salt, they significantly reduce plant damage and environmental contamination. Second, plant salt-tolerant plants. Third, protect salt sensitive plants with burlap wraps, wooden coverings facing the road and by flushing the root zone in spring and summer with lots of water, although root zone washing is only effective with well-drained soil.

Pirone’s Tree Maintenance (7th ed.), Hartman, Pirone and Sall. ranks trees from “Very tolerant” (least sensitive) to “Intolerant” (most sensitive), as follows: Very tolerant:White oak, red oak, black cherry, and eastern red cedar. Tolerant:Yellow birch, black birch, paper birch, gray birch, black locust, and largetooth aspen. Moderately tolerant: Norway maple, red maple, shagbark hickory, hop-hornbeam, American elm, and linden. Intolerant: Sugar maple, white pine, hemlock, beech, red pine, and speckled alder.

For more information, see: www.UMassGreenInfo.org, www.extension.umn.edu, www.safnet.org.

Bruce Wenning is Horticulturist / Grounds Manager at the Massachusetts Audubon Society’s Habitat sanctuary, Belmont and serves on the Board of Directors for the Ecological Landscaping Association. www.ecolandscaping.org.

This article is archived at www.greendecade.org/tabarchive.asp.

Read More...

What is ‘perc’?

By Gilbert Woolley/ Special To The Tab

 

You may have seen a sign in your dry cleaning store: "Perc free cleaning available" and wondered what is "perc " and why you might not want it to be used. “Perc” is short for Perchloroethylene,(C 2 Cl 4), a chlorinated solvent that goes by several other names including PCE and tetrachloroethylene and several trade names. In the forties and fifties perc replaced trichloroethylene, which had replaced carbon tetrachloride (both more hazardous than perc), and is now the solvent used by 90% of dry cleaners in the US. Perc is also widely used in industry as a degreaser. Annual usage in the US is many million of gallons of perc. Some of this undoubtedly finds its way into the groundwater and into drinking water. This cannot be good for the earth or the people living on it!

Chlorinated solvents have been shown to cause cancer in some animals and studies of workers in the US who are in daily contact with Perc vapor have found significantly higher levels of esophageal, bladder, tongue, intestinal, lung and cervical cancer. This is consistent with studies in Canada and the UK.

The US OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) warns that perc is a possible human carcinogen (04/15/05) and strictly limits exposure in the workplace. The International Agency For Research on Cancer classifies perc as a "possible human carcinogen". (1995). Perc accumulates in body fat. More immediate effects include nausea, headaches, dizzy ness and drowsiness. As a customer you wont be exposed to the same levels but it's a good idea to avoid exposure to harmful chlorinated solvents, and people who are sensitive to chemicals should beware of contact with garments cleaned by perc.

Like tobacco and alcohol, Perc is not a deadly poison, but it is harmful, and dry cleaners should be required to provide a written warning to customers, just as makers of tobacco products and alcoholic drinks are required to do. This warning should give the “possible carcinogen" status and warn chemically sensitive users about perc.

For people who are not exposed to perc in the workplace the most likely pathway into the body is through the lungs. You must have noticed the rather unpleasant odor of newly dry cleaned garments Tests show that, even after a hundred days, 40% of the perc in the garment after cleaning is still present. When you pick up a garment from the dry cleaners you should take it out of the plastic bag and hang it outdoors or in a well-ventilated area for some days to reduce the amount of perc vapor you bring into your home. This is especially important for large, heavy items, such as "comforters" and sleeping bags, and when a number of garments are packed in one bag. People who live over, or near to a dry cleaning operation may be exposed to harmful levels of perc vapor.

NIOSH (National Institute of Safety and Health) studied methods to limit perc emissions. The study confirmed that technology is available in Europe to do so. Germany has imposed regulation to mandate use of such technology. This requires a considerable capital investment, and without similar regulation in the US there is no incentive to make this investment. Government regulations prohibit the disposal of perc or water containing perc into a sewer, but these regulations are largely self-enforced. Sewage treatment does not remove perc and treated wastewater will be discharged into rivers or the ocean. Perc has been detected in drinking water at many locations in the US.

Alternatives to perc

Google "perc alternatives" to find alternatives to perc. One "perc free" option is "wet clean", the use of detergents and water instead of perc. Google "wet clean" for more information. There are fabrics that are difficult to wet clean without shrinking and some stains that are easier to remove using perc, but many garments carrying the "dry clean only" label can be safely wet cleaned. New wet clean technology has tightly-controlled temperatures for washing and drying, which makes if possible to wet clean some articles that would be difficult to wash using conventional methods. The most complete page is by the US EPA, (labeled) PDA which gives information on wet cleaning and also lists providers of non-perc cleaning by state.

Wet cleaning eliminates many of the disposal problems of perc because the wastewater can be safely discharged into the sewer. Another advantage is that "non perc" cleaners do not have to register with the EPA.

Another "perc free" method is to launder articles in liquid CO 2 (carbon dioxide), which is non-toxic but this method is not in widespread use. The dry cleaner I use in Newton advertises "perc-free cleaning available" but his system uses oil based, not water based, cleaning fluid.

How to limit exposure to perc

·      Buy as few garments as you can, which carry the "Dry Clean Only" label

·      Use a "wet cleaner" The US EPA web page lists four wet cleaners in Massachusetts, including one in Newton: Corner Cleaners, 1301 Washington St, West Newton.

·      Google "wet cleaners" to get more information

·      Ask your dry cleaner to offer "perc-free" cleaning.

·      Have garments dry-cleaned less often

·      Try careful hand washing. For guidelines go to Google: "stain removal".

 

Gilbert Woolley is a retired engineer. He has been a very active member of the Sierra Club since 1971, and he served on the Sierra Club National Toxics Committee for six years.

This article is archived at www.greendecade.org/tabarchive.asp.

 

Read More...

Wednesday, January 4, 2006

Annual bird count finds 53 species

By M. G. Criscitiello, MD/ Special To The Tab

 

Robins, Blue Jays, Cedar Waxwings were up; American Crows, House Finches, Canada Geese were down; Nuthatches, Hooded Mergansers, Downy Woodpeckers were holding steady; but Wild Turkeys and Wood Ducks were no-shows. The 32nd Annual Christmas Bird Count was held in Newton on Dec. 18 (www.newtonconservators.org/christmasbirdcount.htm). This year 17 local birders joined in, grateful for clear weather: Susan Abele, Dorothy Anderson, Cris Criscitiello, Richard Danca, Pete Gilmore, Jan Gilpin, Liane Hartnett, Deborah & Frank Howard, Sam Jaffe, Ted Kuklinski, Liz Micheels, Steve Olanoff, Anne Pearson, Ian Reid, Al Scott, and David Tobias.

Those who braved the dark at 4:30 a.m. were rewarded by finding eight owls - seven Eastern Screech Owls and one Great Horned Owl - a considerably better showing than last year. Later, after sunrise, five teams of seasoned birders spread across the city, chalking up a list of 53 different species. Eight of these had not been seen in the past few Christmas Counts. They included one hardy American Coot at Crystal Lake; single examples each of a Yellow-bellied Sapsucker, Swamp Sparrow, Rusty Blackbird, and Purple Finch in Cold Spring Park; six Common Mergansers on the Charles River; a Great Horned Owl in Kennard Park; and a Black/Mallard Duck hybrid at Newton Commonwealth Golf Course.

The number of count areas in the US and Canada is now well over 2,000, each consisting of a circle 15 miles in diameter. As the territory covered increases, the data derived become more valid statistically. The Count is performed under the auspices of the National Audubon Society and the Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology.

Modestino Criscitiello, a retired cardiologist, is Professor of Medicine, Emeritus, Tufts University School of Medicine. He is a Board member of the Newton Conservator and host of the Conservators' Environmental Show on NewTV.

Read More...

Making Newton more bike-friendly

By Gilbert Woolley/ Special To The Tab

 

Bicycle paths encourage people who are afraid to ride on the roads to ride for pleasure and business. Riding a bicycle provides healthy exercise without straining the heart and the rider is closer to nature and to other people than when driving. Using a cycle for day-to-day business reduces congestion on the roads and contributes to reducing oil imports, global warming and smog. Bicycle trails are also suitable for easy cross-country skiing.

Newton is not well provided with bicycle paths. The most interesting path passing through the city is the Charles River Bikeway, which goes from the Esplanade in Boston, to Waltham, along one, or sometimes both, sides of the Charles River. It is paved all the way, although full of potholes in places. It is managed, by the Mass. Dept. of Conservation and Recreation.

Although not designated a bicycle path, the "carriage road" on Commonwealth Avenue provides an outstanding bicycle route from Boston College almost to Route 128 and this could be the link to join various shorter trails. Cyclists can, of course, ride on the city’s highways and streets, but for this lifelong cyclist, the main obstacle to cycling on public roads is fear.

A spectacular example, which shows how people will use bicycles when a safe route is provided, is the Minuteman Bikeway, built on a defunct railroad bed from the Alewife ’T’ station in Cambridge, through downtown Lexington, to Bedford. This trail attracts over two million users each year, At times, this "Bikeway" is used too much, not only by cyclists, but also by skate boarders, rollerbladers and people pushing baby carriages. In areas of heavy use it would be helpful if these users could be separated. In the nearby towns of Hudson. Framingham and Natick, other unused rail tracks are being turned into bicycle trails.

Disused railroad beds provide ideal routes for bicycle paths. They are almost flat and there is conflict with automobile traffic only at highway crossings. Newton has an almost unused line from Newton Highlands to Newton Upper Falls and on to Needham. This line crosses the Charles River and Route 128 by bridges and would avoid the cyclist-hazardous intersection of Highland Avenue and Route 128. Other potential bicycle routes are the Sudbury and Cochituate aqueducts. Cycle routes could also be signed on little used streets in order to link cyclable trails in public parks and on conservation land. Proposals to create cycle trails often run into opposition from abutters, who fear that criminals will use it to gain access to their property. This has not proved to be a problem. Criminals, in this country at least, rarely ride bicycles! There has also been a fear that a trail would reduce property values, but realtors report, for example, that abutting the Minuteman trail actually adds value to properties.

Making Newton more bicycle-friendly could provide an opportunity for volunteers to work with the Parks and Recreation Department surveying possible cycle routes. The cost to the city would be minimal. Marking a street as a "bicycle path" gives people confidence that it goes somewhere and that it’s OK to use it.

Bicycle trails do more than provide access to local stores, libraries and schools. An ambitious national organization, Rails to Trails, promotes conversion of abandoned railroad beds to bicycle paths, and has had considerable success. The East Coast Greenway has succeeded in marking a bicycle path from Canada to Florida, and every year, the Greenway adds more "auto free" miles.

Gilbert Woolley, a retired engineer, has been a very active member of the Sierra Club since 1971, He has led Youth Hostel bicycle tours in Europe.

Read More...

Zoos and wildlife conservation

By John Linehan/ Special To The Tab

It never ceases to amaze me when people appear surprised to learn how much zoos in general, and Zoo New England in particular, are doing in the conservation arena. Perhaps some people hold to the outdated perspective of zoos as purely recreational facilities. The role and function of zoos has evolved dramatically in recent years. In the past, we were animal exhibitors and wildlife consumers. Today we are net wildlife producers as well as interpreters for, and advocates of, a natural world under siege.

Zoos are uniquely positioned between the increasingly urbanized human world and the world of wildlife. We are the most effective bridge linking these two disparate worlds. The irony is, of course, that these are not two worlds at all; humans and wildlife are inhabitants of one planet and the survival of all of us is inextricably linked. The bridge we zoos create is built with informational logs and intellectual mortar provided through our exhibits, our signage and our programming. The underpinnings of the bridge lie in the creation of emotional bonds between people and animals. In establishing these bonds, the animals in our Zoos serve as ambassadors par excellence for their wild living brethren. Once established, this is a "bridge" that grows and takes on a life of its own. The challenge for zoos today lies in knowing that there is much bridge construction to be done if we are to secure a healthy future for the children and grandchildren of the Earth’s current inhabitants.

The conservation projects and programs we engage in and support are either in-situ (in an animal’s natural range) or ex-situ (outside an animal’

s natural range), or sometimes both. An example: Zoo NE staff has perfected artificial insemination techniques to produce fertile eggs from our red-crowned cranes which have then been shipped to a Russian nature reserve for hatching, rearing and release. We have supported projects around the world: we are helping to protect African Wild Dogs in Zimbabwe, training herders in Pakistan to manage their flocks to avoid snow leopard predation, and identifying prime jaguar habitat for priority protection in Guatemala. The sad truth is that these programs and projects are mere bandages to slow the bleeding.

In order to save the patient, we must connect the urban population with the natural world and ultimately find ways to change human behavior. To succeed in our mission, our ex-situ programs must replace ignorance with understanding, fear with compassion, and irreverence with respect.

If we can achieve these lofty visions, we will have a profound impact on the generations that follow us. This is a daunting task, and it will not be easy, but we must keep trying, In Margaret Mead’s immortal words, "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."

John Linehan is president and CEO of Zoo New England, the non-profit organization which manages our two state-owned zoos, Franklin Park Zoo in Dorchester and Stone Zoo in Stoneham. He serves on several committees of the American Association of Zoos and Aquariums.

Read More...

Throwing water away

By Robert Zimmerman, Jr./ Special To The Tab

Massachusetts is facing serious water shortages in spite of receiving an average of 45 inches of rainfall a year, or nearly 6.5 trillion gallons of precipitation - enough water to fill 12,922,465 Olympic-sized swimming pools. What is happening to all that water? The scientists and water policy experts at Charles River Watershed Association, located at 190 Park Street in Weston, are studying this complex problem and seeking sustainable solutions.

Groundwater (water in underground aquifers) and surface water (streams, rivers, and lakes, which are slowly replenished by aquifers) in the area surrounding the Charles River have been steadily decreasing for years. Many streams now go dry in summer months, and water use limits are being imposed by some municipalities. The water shortages are primarily the result of the "engineered water cycle" created through uncontrolled development, improper stormwater management, and current wastewater disposal and treatment techniques.

The I-495 technology corridor, one of the fastest growing areas in the state, is a perfect example of what is happening. Land is being rapidly developed, buildings and roads constructed, and traffic congestion is worsening. High-impact development creates more demand for water, to be used in businesses and industries. But the real problem is that the increase in impervious surfaces - roads, parking lots, sidewalks, driveways and buildings - prevent rainwater from infiltrating into the ground and recharging aquifers. In Boston, groundwater infiltration "losses" of stormwater have more than doubled in the past 20 years - in other words, half as much rain now gets through the soil and into the groundwater.

When water cannot percolate through the ground, filtering as it goes down into the aquifer, more contaminants enter the surface waters and negatively impact aquatic habitats. Rainwater is polluted through coming into contact with oil, gasoline, and other substances on roads and buildings, and it is discharged through elaborate drain systems to nearby water bodies. Additionally, during heavy rains, sewer pipes are often designed to overflow and discharge sewage waste directly to rivers and coastal areas.

Our approach to wastewater disposal is another element in the water crisis. Instead of treating wastewater from homes and businesses and then returning it to where it came from, it is piped away to be treated, and often discharged to the ocean or a river. Treating water initially helps reduce local water pollution impacts, but in the long term this results in substantial water loss on the local level. Another problem is in the actual sewage infrastructure - as pipes age, they crack and begin to draw in clean groundwater, which is prone to move into the pipes because the water inside pipes moves much faster than groundwater. On average, about 60% of the wastewater treated at the MWRA’s Deer Island treatment plant is clean ground and storm water that has entered the sewer system through leaks, sump pumps, or roof leaders.

There are two fundamental problems with current approaches to water use and water engineering. First, drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater are looked at as three completely different entities. But water is water. By using it, we do not change its nature. However, when we withdraw water from ground and surface sources, use it, and then throw it away as if it were a waste product, we create enormous consequences for the environment and undermine efforts to sustain water resources. Second, capturing, storing, and centralizing water resource over large regions is unnatural. Nature likes to keep water local, filtering it through the ground, and only in the last instant releasing it as groundwater springs to tributaries and rivers and allowing it to escape to the sea.

To overcome the water shortages Eastern Massachusetts is currently experiencing, we must think about how nature intended the water cycle to be. There is plenty of water, but due to increased development there is not enough filtering through natural surfaces into the groundwater. We need to keep water local, instead of shipping it away to be treated. It is time to stop throwing water away.

Robert Zimmerman, Jr. has been Executive Director of Charles River Watershed Assoc. www.charlesriver.org since 1991. Peggy Sunshine, Development Dir, and Rebecca Scibek, Development Assoc, contributed to this report.

Read More...

What is a pesticide?

By Lucia Dolan/ Special To The Tab

 

A pesticide is a poison. It is designed to kill an insect, weed or fungus. Unfortunately pesticides do not limit themselves to just what we wish to kill. They travel. They run off into water. They vaporize and drift. They come into our home on shoes and pets.

Pesticides can spread very quickly. "Good Morning America" recently reported on an experiment in a classroom at PS 8 in New York City.

They applied Glo-Germ, a nontoxic powder visible only under ultraviolet light, in areas where pesticides are most likely to be sprayed or to settle, such as baseboards and windowsills. Then they invited the children to play. After 20 minutes, UV light showed traces of Glo-Germ all over the children’s clothes, hands and faces.

No pesticide is safe. Federal laws prohibit pesticide manufacturers from making safety claims. The EPA, which has the authority to waive all chronic toxicity testing for consumer pesticides, does not require that pesticides be tested for effects on the immune system or on hormonal systems. Additionally, we know little about "real world" exposures - how pesticides interact with other pesticides or substances such as prescription medicines.

Several studies have shown that dogs are more likely to get cancer when their owners use pesticides. In 2004, Dr. Larry Glickman of Purdue University found that Scottish terriers were four to seven times more likely to get bladder cancer when their owners used pesticides on their lawns. The more time the dogs spent on a treated lawn, the higher their risk. Glickman is now measuring the chemicals levels in children from homes that use pesticides, and he is attempting to discover which chemicals in pesticides cause cancer, the active or the inert ingredients.

One to 3 percent of a pesticide product is "active" ingredients, chemicals designed to kill an unwanted insect, weed or fungus. The other 97 percent consists of ingredients are added to deliver the active ingredient and to make it longer lasting or more effective.

"Inert" ingredients, which are protected by trade secrecy laws, may be more dangerous than "active" ingredients. Pesticide manufacturers can conceal the identity of these ingredients from the public and even from the EPA.

Inert pesticide ingredients can be as benign as water or as toxic as benzene, toluene or xylene. Along with inert ingredients, contaminants, such as dioxin and DDT, sometimes form in pesticides as a result of the chemical production process. When pesticide products are used they interact with the environment, (soil, water, air) and can form toxic metabolites. Only a few of the 613 active pesticide ingredients have been tested for health or environmental effects. But solid knowledge of a pesticides dangers do not automatically lead to a government ban.

Methyle bromide is a neurotoxin, and its effects have been known for years. It destroys the ozone layer and has fatally poisoned farm workers in California. The U.S. government has signed an international treaty to ban methyle bromide in 2005, but it is currently negotiating an exemption to prevent "market disruption." Fifty-six farm organizations, including the largest, the American Farm Bureau, oppose the ban on methyle bromide. Farmers insist that alternatives to methyle bromide are too costly.

Too costly to whom? When the EPA decides that a pesticide’s benefits outweigh its risks, they do not factor into the equation the cost of illnesses, disabilities or environmental degradation. These costs are difficult or impossible to measure in the short term, but they are substantial and serious.

Pesticides are a quick fix, a short-term approach. Fortunately, there are alternatives to pesticides, such as Integrated Pest Management, which offer long-term solutions that focuses on correcting the cause of insect, weed or fungus problems. IPM protects drinking water, food, soil and air by minimizing, if not eliminating, pesticide use. It is an ecosystem approach that protects biodiversity.

In the coming months GreenCAP will have articles on these pages discussing safer approaches to common pest problems, weedy lawns, bees and wasps, and more. For more information visit www.beyondpesticides.org, www.pesticide.org, and www.greendecade.org.

Lucia Dolan, co-chairman of GreenCAP, is on the board of the Green Decade Coalition.

Read More...

Pests who don’t take winter off

By Bruce Wenning/ Special To The Tab

Very few insects, especially pest species, are active at low temperatures. Most insect species in New England feed, mature and mate during the warmer months. The few that are active during the colder months have physiological traits that protect them from the cold. These traits lead to the production of specific sugar and alcohol compounds that circulate in their blood and prevent the insect from freezing when there is a gradual drop in air temperature.

 

In our area, there are three important insect pests that can tolerate cold weather. The first is a dull brownish moth that is drawn to house lights at night. Called the Winter Moth (Operophtera brumata), the males can be seen by the hundreds covering the sides of buildings, doors, and windows at dusk and dawn. (The wingless females are flightless.) This pest, which resembles our native Fall Cankerworm Moth - and makes its appearance at about the same time - is new to the area. However, Winter Moth is well known on the South Shore and Cape Cod, where oaks, maples, crabapples, cherries and other trees and shrubs have been partially to completely defoliated over the past few years.

After mating, Winter Moths leave clusters of eggs in tree bark, which begin to hatch in March. The yellow-green larvae crawl up the tree, inchworm style, to feed on buds and leaves until mid-June, creating holes in leaves and loss of flower petals. The larvae extrude a long silken thread that functions like a parachute to transport them from one tree to another. After they fall to the ground and penetrate the soil, they spin a cocoon, undergo pupation, and emerge as adult moths in late fall. Recently, the moth has been re-emerging in great numbers here. It is essential to understand the timing of this complex life cycle to address the problem. There are only short-term solutions available now (for specifics see the Web site listed at the end of this article). Fortunately, a promising long-term solution to this problem is being tested by Joseph Elkinton, PhD, an entomologist at U Mass/Amherst. His research will be described in detail in a follow-up article on these pages.

The second cold weather insect pest is more familiar - the Hemlock Woolly Adelgid (Adelges tsugae). This sap- sucker attaches itself at the bases of hemlock needles and inserts its piercing mouth-parts into the needle base and siphons sap. It is a specific pest of Eastern hemlock (Tsuga Canadensis) and Carolina hemlock (T. caroliniana). This accidentally introduced insect, originally from Japan, has devastated hemlock stands in forests of Connecticut and further south. It is moving northward into southern New Hampshire, Maine, and Vermont. Both immature and adult stages are very small and are inactive during the summer months. They start feeding and maturing into adults during the fall. From January to mid-April, females produce egg masses secured in tiny "cotton balls" located at branch tips, white clusters that are easy to spot in the winter. The best time to treat these hemlocks is from late March to mid-September. Horticultural oil will suffocate the eggs, nymphs, and adults of this pest if you apply the oil thoroughly. Horticultural oil is very low in toxicity and is used and approved by organic farmers and gardeners. It kills all stages of the adelgid, including the egg stage by suffocation, unlike traditional petroleum based insecticides. Insect pests treated with oil do not build up resistance to this compound. However, petroleum based insecticides are neurotoxins and with overuse will cause insecticide resistance, health problems to humans and other animals and contaminate the environment.

The third cold weather pest, which feeds on turf grass roots, is the European chafer (Rhizotrogus majalis). The adults are brown colored beetles that emerge from the soil by mid June; the immature stage is called a white grub and is similar in appearance to the Japanese beetle (Popillia japonica) grub. Because European chafer adults mostly fly during the night to lights they frequently go unnoticed by people. The lawn damage caused by the grubs is noticed by most people, although it is frequently blamed on the Japanese beetle grub. But not all grubs are Japanese beetles. In fact, there are two more turf grass root-feeding white grubs common in our area, the Oriental beetle (Anomala orientalis) and the Asiatic garden beetle (Maladera castanea).

The European chafer can be much more devastating to home lawns than the other three grub species because it is the only grub that can feed during cold weather, causing turf grass root damage in the early spring and into the fall when the other grub species are inactive. According to Patricia Vittum, Professor of Entomology at UMA/Amherst, European chafers have been observed feeding on turf grass roots under snow as early as February, much earlier in the season than the other three grub species.

For more information on the identification, control and life cycle details of these insect pests visit, www.UMassGreenInfo.org

Bruce Wenning is the property manager at the Massachusetts Audubon Society Habitat sanctuary, Belmont, and serves on the Board of Directors of the Ecological Landscaping Association, www.ecolandscaping.org.

Read More...

Friday, December 9, 2005

Wildlife in the city

During the past decade new types of wild creatures have appeared in parks, woodlands and backyards of the city. In addition to the usual skunks, raccoons, squirrels, rabbits, chipmunks, and Canada geese, there are now coyotes, foxes, bobcats, fisher, weasels, river otter, wild turkeys, and an increasingly large white-tailed deer population. Moose have not yet appeared in Newton, but they have had front-page notice in towns nearby, and black bears have reentered the forests of western Massachusetts. Will they be our next big visitors?

Reasons for this change were presented by Colleen Olfenbuttel, staff member of the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife www.masswildlife.org, in her Nov. 15 lecture at the Newton Free Library sponsored by the Newton Conservators. She noted that all of these animals were living in the forests of New England when European settlers arrived in the 17th century. They disappeared after the trees were cut for timber and the land cleared for farming. By 1840, much of the soil was exhausted, farming became more difficult, and people moved to richer lands of the Midwest or sought their fortunes in large cities with the coming of the industrial revolution.

Since that time, our forests have returned, and now an estimated 70% of Massachusetts is covered with second growth. This has led to restoration of wild animal populations, with the exception of wolves and mountain lions, entirely extirpated from the Northeast through bounty hunting. As housing has exploded into rural areas, with developments rising in forested landscapes, human encounters with wildlife have increased. Suburban gardens, shrubs, fruit trees, and bird feeders provide tempting food for many wild creatures, and garbage added to mulch piles or left outside in trash bags spells "dinner" for raccoons, skunks and coyotes. Crawl spaces under porches and garages attract these same animals, also foxes, as dens for rearing young. With hunting prohibited, large predators absent, food supplies handy, and living space provided, why should they forego such comforts?

Living with wildlife in our surroundings is a source of pleasure for most Newton residents, but we find some challenges in our attempt to maintain a healthy and happy coexistence with these new species as they return to their rightful domain. In order that they may be protected and continue normal patterns of behavior in the wild, it is important that they not become dependent on humans for food and living space. To underscore this point, Olfenbuttel introduced a discussion of the coyote, displaying a beautiful mounted specimen of the animal. Many who had never seen one in the wild expressed surprise at its relatively small size - its average weight is only 40 pounds.

She described the territorial behavior of the coyote. Its howling and yipping at night are a means of keeping in touch with other members of its group - and a warning to outsiders to stay away! Coyotes are shy and wary by nature, avoiding contact with people. Their diet is varied, and they can be tempted into neighborhoods where food is available. True omnivores, they prey on small mammals such as squirrels and chipmunks, but they also like fruits, berries, and birdseed. They will eat road kill or any pet food or garbage left outdoors. They have been known to run down unprotected small house pets. Owners of cats and little dogs are advised to keep them indoors. (Because house cats, across the nation, kill millions of birds each year, there is further reason to keep them inside!)

To maintain coyotes in their normal wild state, Mass Wildlife suggests the following:

1.     Don’t feed or try to pet them!

2.    Put garbage outdoors in strong containers, not plastic bags

3.    Feed pets indoors so unfinished food is not left outside.

4.    Don’t let cats or small dogs roam freely outside

5.    Keep areas under bird feeders clean

6.    Close off crawl spaces under porches.

If coyotes become persistent in hanging around, help them to remain wary of humans by scaring them off with loud noises, a bright light, or even water sprayed from a hose if necessary.

Wild turkeys and the Canada Goose are also year-round Newton residents, but these animals will be discussed in another article.

The goal of conservation is to preserve appropriate habitat for those species rejuvenated by the return of our forests, allowing them to live in nature as they were originally born to it. The effort of Mass Wildlife is to reacquaint the public with the particular needs and behaviors of these animals, so they can remain as wild creatures while sharing much of their territory with the human population.

 Modestino Criscitiello is Professor of Medicine, Emeritus, Tufts University School of Medicine. He is a Board member of the Newton Conservator and host of the Conservators’

Environmental Show on NewTV.

Read More...

These teens relish Envi-Sci

In our busy suburban world kids don’t get to experience nature much unless it’s planned into their schedules. That’s why Newton’s Environmental Science Program for teens is special. You can see this program in action during December on NewTV, Newton’s community cable television channel.

This episode of The Environmental Show travels along with teens as they go hiking, biking, canoeing and climbing, and visit woods and ponds, the Charles River, parks, a salt marsh, and mountains, winding up with a stay at the highest peak in the northeast (Mt. Washington). They also participate in a hands-on environmental cleanup project each year. As several of the teens point out, they make friends and have fun while they’re out there.

The summer program was started by Newton teachers 38 years ago with a Ford Foundation grant designed to get kids out into the environment instead of learning about it only through books and labs. The program now operates under the Newton Conservation Commission. Many of the students eventually become leaders in the program, trained to teach their younger peers what they have learned about plants and animals, geology, and ecology.

In fact, many of the participants go on to careers in science. All carry with them a lifetime appreciation for our natural environment.

 To learn more about enrolling in this July program for teens, visit http://www.newtonenvisci.org or call David Backer, Exec. Director, at 617-969-0288.

 To watch this show, tune in to NewTV’s Blue Channel (Channel 10 for Comcast subscribers and Channel 15 for RCN subscribers). The show will run repeatedly through December on Saturdays (10 a.m.), Mondays (3 p.m.), Tuesdays (1:30 p.m. and 11:30 p.m.), Wednesdays (11:30 a.m.) and Thursdays noon, 4 p.m. and 7:30 p.m.

 This episode of the Environmental Show is produced by the Newton Conservators. Learn more about the organization’s programs and view beautiful photographs at www.newtonconservators.org.

Patricia Goldman is a former Executive Director of the Asthma & Allergy Foundation of America/New England Chapter, a former member of the Newton Human Rights Commission, and is currently a board member of NewTV helping to produce The Environmental Show.

Read More...

Insulation: A wise investment

By Paul Eldenkramp/ Special To The Tab

The Kyoto Committee of the Green Decade Coalition/Newton has been investigating insulation quality in Newton houses and has been finding lots of missed opportunities.

A well-insulated house is comfortable and treads more lightly on the environment - and it is a good investment. Let’s say you spend $4,000 on an insulation upgrade and anticipate saving $500 in fuel costs per year. If you expect to live in your house for 15 more years, and assuming a 5 percent annual rate of increase in fuel costs, the rate of return on your weatherization investment will be 13.7 percent. That’s an excellent investment from a financial perspective, aside from the benefits of increased comfort and decreased carbon emissions. (For a simple on-line tool to calculate investment return for energy improvements, see www.energytools.com/calc/EnerEcon.html).

We found three basic types of insulation problems - let’s call them investment opportunities - in our initial studies of older Newton homes: no insulation, old insulation in need of an upgrade, and new insulation done badly.

Many older Newton homes have no insulation at all. Some homeowners believe that adding insulation puts an older house at risk of moisture problems, but if you have no moisture problems now, adding insulation willnot create them. If you have existing moisture issues - roof or window leaks, relative indoor humidity above 60 percent in the winter, or standing water in the basement after a rain - then adding insulation may complicate the problem, so address those issues prior to insulating.

Some homeowners are not aware that they have no insulation. If you are one of them, check the attic first. If you have no insulation there, you probably have none in the walls, because the attic is the easiest place to insulate. To check if the walls have insulation, drill a 1-inch hole in an out-of-the-way place (like the back of a closet) through the plaster and lathe (no deeper) and shine a flashlight in. If you’re looking into an empty cavity, you probably have no wall insulation.

In one of our "Kyoto case studies" we looked at a house that had no insulation, but which had new cooling and heating equipment that was roughly twice the capacity that would have been required had the house been insulated. That extra heating and cooling capacity cost several thousand dollars - money that would have been invested more wisely in insulation, which would have significantly reduced operating costs.

Many homeowners insulated their houses during the spikes in energy costs in the mid-1970s or early 1980s. Since then, we have learned more effective insulation methods and new products and technologies have been developed. An area of your house that may not have been cost-effective to insulate in 1980 may offer good payback now.

Air-sealing is as essential to insulating a house as insulation itself. There are two good methods for achieving this. Dense pack cellulose involves blowing cellulose insulation into walls to a density of about 3.5 pounds per foot, a density at which the material is packed solidly enough to inhibit air leakage but not so solid as to promote heat loss through conduction. To achieve the proper density, the installer’s equipment needs to be well tuned and he or she needs to know where to drill holes for maximum coverage and precisely how to insert the hose into the holes. Don’t take these prerequisites for granted - ask questions.

Spray-foam insulations, such as two-part polyurethane foams and Icynene, have established track records for safety and performance. They’re best used in open bays - as in walls prior to the application of the drywall and in attic rafters. Some contractors will spray foam into closed cavities such as finished walls but in that application cellulose is usually safer, cheaper, and equally effective.

Accomplishing a good insulation job in an old home can be difficult and counter-intuitive. Insulation crews tend to target easy spaces that maximize the amount of material they can install in the least amount of time. Sometimes this works, but sometimes it misses the mark.

One home we audited had had major insulation work done under a utility-company rebate program in 2001 at a cost of several thousand dollars, but the house was one of the worst performers we documented. The job had been done with a poorly tuned blower that did not generate sufficient nozzle pressure to force enough cellulose into the walls, resulting in settling of material and insulation voids. No attention had been paid to air-sealing, so there were major cold spotson interior walls because of cold air leakage into the basement, up interior chases and out through attic eaves.

To prevent such missed opportunities, the Kyoto Committee has concluded that it’s worth spending $250-350 for an energy audit that includes a blower door test and an infrared scan of your house. Audits can be arranged through Keyspan if you have gas heat and NSTAR if you have oil or electric heat. If your house has little or no insulation, do the audit as you are nearing completion of the insulation job. Prior to then, the audit will mainly document that you have a leaky house - something you knew already. After most of the work has been done, however, the audit will tell you exactly where to focus the final efforts - the infrared camera will reveal specific insulation voids in walls, and the blower door test will pinpoint areas of leakage that should be sealed, usually with spray foam insulation. If the house has been insulated with cellulose, you can use a few cans of lumberyard spray foam to provide enough air-sealing to make a big difference. However, given some of the tricky roof configurations of these older homes, you may need to hire a spray foam crew to finish the job.

In conclusion, we can say with confidence, based on our audits, that for older homes where insulation work was done in the 1970s, it’s time for an upgrade from an energy savings perspective. We have equal confidence that homeowners will reap financial benefits from these improvements.

Paul Eldrenkamp is a Newton-based remodeling contractor and chair of the Green Decade Coalition’s Kyoto Committee.

Read More...

Wednesday, December 7, 2005

Bats and EIDs

By Tigga Kingston/ Special To The Tab

 

Gently, I reach into the holding bag and pull out the first of the night’

s catch. 65 million years of evolutionary perfection - a beautiful trefoil horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus trifoliatus). Her grayish-fawn fur is long and fluffy and she has yellow ears, elbows and knees and tan-colored wings.

With over 1,100 species, bats account for 20 percent of mammals and are found on all continents except Antarctica. In the wet tropics bats comprise more than half the mammal species, and in South America over 100 species can coexist at a single locality. This species richness is matched by unparalleled ecological diversity- bats eat fruits, nectar, leaves, insects, small terrestrial vertebrates, and fish. Despite popular myths, there are only three species of vampire bats, restricted to Central and South America.

 

Tragically, nearly a quarter of all bat species are threatened by extinction, mainly due to habitat loss, hunting, disturbance at roost sites and pesticides. Conservation has been greatly impeded by a lack of understanding of these animals. Demonized and feared across cultures for centuries, shrouded in myth and prejudice, bats now face another challenge to their unfairly tarnished image - their role as natural wildlife reservoirs in the emergence of new and sometimes fatal infectious diseases.

In 2005, scientists identified three horseshoe bat species (genus Rhinolophus) from China as the probable natural wildlife reservoir for the SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) virus. SARS first emerged in China in 2002, infected about 8,000 people around the world in 2003 and killed more than 750 people; the cost to the global economy was more than $50 billion. SARS is one of several infectious diseases that emerged in the last decade in which bats have been identified as the probable wildlife reservoir. In the late 1990s, Nipah virus spilled over from pigs to humans in Malaysia, resulting in the death of 108 people. Old World fruit bats in the genus Pteropus (flying foxes) appear to be the original hosts of Nipah virus, the related Hendra virus, and probably Ebola virus.

From a conservation perspective, this would seem to be the final nail in the coffin of bat public relations. The health and economic impacts of Emerging Infectious Diseases are a global concern, and it is critical that outbreaks are controlled and minimized, but we must protect bats while addressing these diseases.

Large-scale culling programs - often the first response of beleaguered governments- are the last thing biologists and conservationists wish to see. Bats are a major and unique component of global biodiversity, and provide critical ecosystem and economic services as pollinators, seed dispersers and predators of insects. For example, in the Old World, more than 500 economically important products are derived from these plants pollinated or dispersed by bats - including favorites such as durian, petai, mango, banana, guava, figs, carob, cashew, avocado, dates, jackfruit and papaya. The durian trade alone is worth in excess US$1.5 billion annually.

Insectivorous bats consume a least half their body weight in insects every night. In a six month period, a single colony of Mexican free-tailed bats may consume over 2,450 metric tons of insects, which include the most damaging agricultural and forestry pests.

Ethical and conservation issues aside, eradication of host species is ineffective in managing disease. Seventy years of aggressive campaigns to eradicate vampire bats (sometimes deploying draconian methods such as poison gas or blasting) did little to control bovine rabies in South America but resulted in the destruction of millions of bats of many species. Eventually, ecological and behavioral research led to selective control methods that are now proving effective. Policy must be based on solid research.

In the wild, host bat species show little signs of infection by the viruses they harbor. These viruses have been present in bat populations for 1000s -maybe millions - of years, but have only emerged recently. Understanding why bat-borne viruses are emerging now is the key to predicting and minimizing future outbreaks.

Although bats can pass some diseases directly to humans, such as rabies, in many cases (including, Hendra, Nipah and SARS) there is no direct transmission of the virus from bats to people. The viruses usually infect an intermediate "amplifier" host that is in contact with both bats and humans. In SARS this host was the masked palm civet. These are naive hosts with little or no resistance to the pathogens, resulting in rapid replication of the virus. This promotes transmission to other individuals of the same species, and can lead to genetic modifications that enable the virus to jump to humans. In most cases transmission to humans has occurred only among people closely associated with an amplifier host. In China wildlife traders and restaurant owners were the first to become infected with SARS, which reached epidemic proportions because of human-human transmission.

Historically bats had very little contact with spillover hosts, certainly not enough to sustain an infectious virus. Civets are generally solitary; it was the unnatural aggregations in crowded wildlife markets supplying the wildlife meat trade in South China that enabled them to become potential hosts. Neither pigs nor horses are native to Australia and farm pigs in Malaysia are far removed from their wild boar relatives, so all these represent naive hosts. Intensive farming practices then promote the rapid spread of pathogens within local populations.

Introducing domestic livestock into remote areas, coupled with intensive animal husbandry practices, have created opportunities for these diseases to emerge. In the live markets of China, bats and bat products are widely sold for food and traditional medicine, bringing them into direct contact with other wildlife traded for meat such as civets. The outbreak of Nipah virus in Malaysia was similarly precipitated by human actions. Fruit bats throughout South East Asia and Australia have declined dramatically due to hunting and habitat loss; these stressors have led to changes in foraging behavior that can directly impact viral dynamics while bringing bats into close proximity with people and livestock. Pig consumption of fruit pulp spat out by the bats seems to be the route by which infected saliva and urine passed from bats to pigs in Malaysia, and the mode of transmission from bats to horses is probably similar. Infectious diseases have emerged due to human actions that affect the availability of amplifier hosts and the ecology of reservoir hosts. These diseases will not be controlled by controlling bats, but the risks could be minimized if links between reservoir species and spillover hosts are broken. In the short term, trade in wild animals for medicine and food increases the risks, and it is clear that domestic livestock should not be housed near fruit bat feeding trees. In the long-term, research on the interaction between host ecology, species-species transmission and human modification of the environment are the most likely means by which the emergence of new infectious diseases will be controlled.

Tigga Kingston, PhD, Sr Res Assoc, Geography & Environment Dept, BU, Director of the Malaysian Bat Conservation Research Unit, studies bat diversity in the threatened rainforests of SE Asia. Her work focuses on understanding the ecology, conservation biology and evolution of these vital mammals.

 

Read More...

Towns work to identify, eliminate bacteria in river

By David Kaplan/ Special To The Tab

The Charles River’s Lower Basin is one of the most heavily trafficked recreation waters in Massachusetts, supporting thousands of boaters daily in peak summer months. Despite marked improvement in the river’s water quality from 1995, bacteria levels sometimes exceed Massachusetts’ standards for safe swimming and boating.

Illicit connections of sanitary sewer pipes to stormwater pipes are a significant source of bacterial pollution and can discharge untreated sanitary waste into the Charles River even in dry weather. "Federal policy requires towns to initiate stronger and more vigilant illicit connection detection and elimination programs," said Anna Eleria, environmental engineer at Charles River Watershed Association. "Watershed towns have responded with action plans to step up their efforts to reduce bacterial pollution in their water bodies."

Eleria cited work in Newton and Brookline involving water sampling and dye testing within the stormwater infrastructure to pinpoint potential sources of wastewater and remove the connections to the stormwater system.

According to Newton’s quarterly report to the US EPA, the overseeing body, on their progress in detecting and eliminating illicit connections, the city is in the process of mapping and sampling stormwater catch basins and outfall locations to determine areas of concern for future analysis and action. In their report, Brookline officials estimate that nine illicit connections and nearly 3,500 gallons per day of wastewater flows have already been removed from the stormwater drainage system.

The Charles River also receives bacteria and other pollution from raw sewage released from combined sewer outfalls during heavy rain events. Combined sewers are antiquated systems originally designed to collect and convey a combination of both stormwater and sanitary wastewater directly into a lowland waterbody.

The Massachusetts Water Resources Authority collects combined wastewater in interceptor pipes and pumps it to the Deer Island Wastewater Treatment Plant in Winthrop. To prevent sewers from backing up into homes, combined sewer overflows are activated when inflow exceeds the treatment plant’s capacity, dumping millions of gallons of treated and untreated sewage into the river each year.  

Boston and Cambridge still have combined systems and are working towards their eventual separation, which will reduce inflow to the treatment plant and decrease the frequency of CSO discharges. Cambridge recently separated sewerage in the Cambridgeport area and has more projects on the horizon. Separating systems is both time-consuming and costly, but must be done to secure the future health of the Charles River and its boaters.

Acknowledging the public’s need for better, "real-time" water quality information, CRWA, with financial aid from federal, state and local government programs created and implemented a water quality monitoring and public notification project in 1998. The program completed its eighth successful season in October 2005 with its assessment of bacteria levels for the Head of the Charles Regatta.

"Samples taken from the Charles are analyzed for fecal coliform bacteria, which signals the presences of human and animal waste and is also an indicator of other, more harmful bacteria," said Ariel Dekovic, who manages daily notification of the flag colors. "The models predict daily fecal coliform bacteria concentrations, and the probability that these concentrations exceed the Massachusetts state water quality standard for safe boating conditions."

The program relies on a combination of water quality sampling and the use of statistical models developed by CRWA in 2002 in collaboration with U.S. Geological Survey and Tufts University.

David Kaplan, MA (Environmental Mgmt, Duke University), was a CRWA intern in 2000 and is now one of their Watershed Scientists. He is proficient in GIS, and has worked extensively on water quality projects.

Read More...

Opinion: Chicken Little was right

By Lois Levin/ Special To The Tab

Your childhood fears were not irrational.  It’s a dangerous world.  Marvelous medical and technological innovations bring us many comforts, information at lightning speed, and can rescue us from the jaws of death, but we are nonetheless becoming more vulnerable to environmental collapse and to pandemics.

These two looming threats are interrelated.  The planet can support billions of people, but some of them, and enormous quantities of goods and natural resources, travel rapidly around the globe every day.  Toxic substances are dispersed unrelentingly into the air, water, soil; the planet warms, disrupting all of Earth’s ecosystems.

There have been many pandemics in human history.  Viruses mutate and cross into human populations from contact with wild animals, moving as rapidly as people and goods around the planet, as hitchhikers.  They include:  Avian Flu, West Nile Virus, SARS, Ebola and HIV/AIDS.  We have no natural immunity to these viruses, which spread wherever people congregate.

Avian flu, in particular, threatens the entire planet as fast as our efficient transportation systems are moving passengers.  We have the knowledge today to develop vaccines and to implement immunization programs against these diseases, but not rapidly enough to prevent large numbers of deaths and great human suffering.  Viruses spread like wildfire after escaping from a wild population and mutating.

We cannot keep apace of Emerging Infectious Disease (EIDs).  It took nearly two years for SARS viruses to get to the first human trials, and it will take another two years before safe general distribution is possible. And immunizing all at-risk individuals is impossible.

The underlying problems are: (1) Deforestation – humans are unrelentingly invading and destroying wildlife habitat, and  (2) inadequate control of wildlife commerce.  Even a crash program to produce enough vaccine for everyone within our borders would not solve those dilemmas.  And we cannot, like Osama bin Laden, all move to caves in remote mountains.

EID is a global issue.  The major burden of its costs to the environment and to human health are borne by the public. Most national governments have limited resources, but the rich nations and big corporations can afford to underwrite immunization programs in countries where cases of bird flu are now occurring.  Such programs, albeit reactive measures, could immunize all the farmers who handle poultry as well as their families, and could closely monitor the local people who are at greatest risk.  This is an approach that requires a shift in thinking beyond the current focus on domestic interventions.  But immunization programs are not enough.

We have much work to do to convince our own government and multinational corporations to take proactive actions to address this looming crisis.  That means looking at the big picture.  It means implementing tried and true conservation measures to stop deforestation and to control illegal wildlife trade – the reasons that these diseases are emerging in the first place.

Lois Levin, PhD, a Green Decade Coalition board member, coordinates the Environment Page of the Newton TAB.

Read More...